Chapter 4.
THE EPOCH OF THE XII CENTURY
10. WHY THE RECURRING NAMES APPEARED ON THE MAPS OF THE XIV-XVI CC.
The 'Mongol' conquest of Eurasia transferred many Russian-Turkic and Ataman (Ottoman) names of the cities, rivers and regions in all kinds of directions. The conquerors would arrive to the undeveloped lands, settle there and often call the new places with the traditional names, in memory of the homeland that they have left. For example, the name Horde, which appeared in England, in Spain and in many locations in Western Europe, Asia and America, multiplied a number of times. The name of COSSACKS also multiplied, turning into the names of various regions, separated from each other by thousands of kilometres. For example - in Spain and in Japan [4v]. The same thing happened to a name RUS' (RUSSIA): there appeared P-Russia or Prussia, Persia, Paris, etc. The names of TATARS and TIRKOMEN (TURKI) also spread and gave birth to the name of the Francs in the West, the Turks in Asia, and also such names as Thrace, Africa, etc. [����]
The natural transfer of the names along the routes of conquest in the XIV-XVI cc. overlapped later, in the XVII-XVIII cc. with another effect, which also led to the proliferation of the geographical names. One of the main results that we achieved is that the majority of the surviving ancient chronicles are LAYERED, as in their final form they were created or edited in the XVII-XVIII cc. The original chronicle would be overlaid with its duplicates, moreover, sometimes - with a chronological shift. It resulted with an elongated layered chronicle. This could recur several times. As a result, the events were doubled, the geography shifted, the dates were changed.
Something similar was happening in the XVII-XVIII cc. with the geographical descriptions.
# The first such descriptions were not the maps in the modern sense of this word, but just brief LISTS OF COUNTRIES AND NATIONS.
# Later the maps were depicted in the form of a circle divided into three sectors – Europe, Asia and Africa. These sections were defined by the form of a Christian T-shaped cross. Inside each sector the corresponding countries and nations were listed. This is exactly what the old Scandinavian maps look like in the geographical tracts [5v1], ch.11.
# With the development of the coastwise navigation, i.e. along the coasts, the maps with the rough contours of the countries appeared. The first navigators, constrained to keep to the shore, represented the seas as long rivers. It was as yet difficult for them to appreciate the scope of the seas and the oceans due to lack of a mariner's compass [1v], ch.5:11.
# Only later, with the beginning of the epoch of the Great geographical discoveries of the XV-XVI cc, with the invention of the compass, we see, that the countries and the seas on the maps of the XVI-XVIII cc. started to acquire much more credible contours and the geographical descriptions became more detailed. In the XIV-XVI cc. many geographical names multiplied, being transferred by the Hordian conquerors to the various regions of the world colonized by them.
# In the XVII-XVIII cc. a new Scaligerian history and a 'new geography' started being created and adopted. As the original geographical maps had an appearance of texts and lists of names, they unavoidably were subjected to the 'Scaligerian duplication', in a similar way to the chronicles.
In the XVII-XVIII cc. the historians began to wipe out the Great Empire from the chronicles. Besides, many imperial names were removed from the maps and replaced with different ones. They could also be relocated. A number of the geographical shifts-relocations were made. For example, it was declared that the Biblical Jerusalem 'was always situated' in present day Palestine, but it 'was never situated' in the Bosporus. The Romanovs' historians began to claim, that the chronicle history of Velikii Novgorod unfolded on the swampy desolate banks of the Volkhov River, but not at all on the banks of the Volga River, in the famous Yaroslavl and around it. And so on and so forth.
All the activities on the remaking of the geographical maps were purely office work i.e. was carried out on paper. Some famous 'Mongol' names were given to 'still vacant' spots on Earth. Then, the imperial names, which were transferred over there, were 'stuck' to the real nations, who lived there, and embedded into their conscience, writing system, geography and science along with the bits of the former history of Russia-Horde and The Atamania (Ottoman Empire), which were confiscated by force and replanted into the new places. The events which took place, for example, in Russia, were transferred - on paper - to the territory of modern China.
The missionaries, already with the Scaligerian maps in their hands, arrived, for instance, to Africa or China and announced to the natives what their country and they themselves were called in the 'ancient times'. And also what deeds their ancestors committed. At first the natives were baffled and shrugged their shoulders, but then agreed contentedly.
Thus, the geographical names of the various regions of the 'Mongol' Empire began to wander at first on paper, and later across the world. This process concluded only in the XVIII-XIX cc.
11. THE RIDDLE OF THE ETRUSCANS.
Let us look at the history of the Etruscans in more detail. To recap, in the XIII century the Trojan War takes place, as the result of which the GOTHS – TATARS – TARQUINII – 'MONGOLS' – RUSSIANS – seize Czar-Grad. After a while the 'MONGOLS'= THE GREAT ONES, aka the Tarquinii = the Tatar Khans invade the West. This is at the very beginning of the XIV century.
Specifically they colonize Italy and are firmly established in Florence. At the end of the XIV century the Etruscans (the Russians) lay the foundation of a small fortification, calling it Rome. The word ROME could have originated from a Russian word RAMO = a shoulder, an arm, a part of an arm up to an elbow. The plural - is RAMENA, in Russian. This is an old form. Hence the word RAMA (meaning a 'frame' in Russian), as a space restricted by something. The Russian word ARMIYA (meaning ARMY) and the English ARMOUR, also originate from here. The Greek ROMEA could have also come from here. The current belief that ROME is an 'ancient', purely Latin word is a consequence of inaccurate chronology.
The name Rome was also considered to be a reference to THE ENTIRE STATE (denomination of the state as the whole). The Latini used the word Urbis = City for Rome, and Orbis – world, universe. A corresponding Russian word is MIR (meaning WORLD in Russian). Many times we came across the backwards reading of names in the multilingual chronicles. For example, the Arabs and the Jews read from the right to the left; the Europeans read from the left to the right. That is why the words MIR (WORLD in Russian) and RIM (ROME in Russian) could have turned into each other when read by the peoples of different nationalities. Thus the MONGOLIAN WORLD would turn into the GREAT ROME and vice versa.
There is as yet an unsolved puzzle in Scaligerian history. Namely – THE ETRUSCANS. The people, who allegedly, even before the founding of Rome in the VIII century BC, appeared in Italy, created a wonderful culture there and then mysteriously vanished leaving behind numerous artefacts covered with incomprehensible writings, which are indecipherable to many generations of the scientists despite their strenuous efforts.
In our concept the 'riddle of the Etruscans' is resolved. It turns out that in the XIX century the scientists A.D.Chertkov and F.Volansky proposed their solution. They discovered the method of decoding and reading the Etruscan inscriptions. According to them THESE INSCRIPTIONS WERE SLAVONIC. THEREFORE THE ETRUSCANS WERE SLAVS. It became clear why the Etruscans called themselves 'Rasenna', i.e. the Rasens, the Russians [106], p.72.
However, the solution of the Etruscan riddle, put forward by these scientists, despite the indisputable interpretation of at least several Etruscan texts, conflicted with the spirit of Scaligerian history entirely. This was enough TO UNDERMINE BELIEF in A.D. Chertkov and F.Volansky, despite the fact that nobody could contest their theory. It seems there was nothing to object to – as A.D. Chertkov and F.Volansky in fact had successfully read many Etruscan inscriptions. Until today, for over a hundred years, the Etruscologists kept quiet about the findings of these scientists.
Furthermore, probably not being able to find other ways to oppose A.D.Chertkov and F.Volansky, some people began to deliberately mock them by earnestly publishing the 'research' with supposedly similar, but obviously meaningless 'decoding' (for example S.Grinevich, V.A.Chudinov). Substituting the opponents' arguments with other meaningless arguments is a dishonest, but, unfortunately, prevailing method of 'scientific warfare'.
This position is understandable. On one hand, what retort can one have if many Etruscan inscriptions indeed – as A.D.Chertkov and F.Volansky show us – can be read and understood based on use of Slavonic languages. You cannot really say that 'it is a coincidence'. On the other hand it is impossible to concur with it. If the Et-ruscans were Slavs, than it immediately follows, that they must have been Russian!
So what does it mean then? – Can it be that it was the Russians who founded the Italian Etruria? – the 'centre of the most ancient civilization in Italy and the eternal patroness and protector of religions' – according to the cardinal Egidio da Viterbo [106], p.4.
So what then? – The Russians lived in Italy before the founding of Rome. In Scaligerian history this would be inconceivable. But in the new chronology all obstacles to the acceptance of A.D. Chertkov and F.Volansky's results are removed. Furthermore, it would be extremely odd if the Russian-Turk conquest left no traces in the Italy of the XIV-XVI cc. As it was Et-ruscan 'Mongols' = the Mighty who arrived there in the XIII-XIV cc., prior to the founding of Italian Rome in the XIV-XV cc.
Some scientists are trying to comprehend the obvious traces of the wide spreading of the old Slavic objects and inscriptions found all over Eurasia, and are doing their best to find a place in Scaligerian chronology, where they could insert all of this prolific Slavic material. But as all of the Middle Ages 'was full up', they have to go into a distant past and come up with theories of certain 'most ancient' Proto-Slavic people. In our view all such findings relate not to the Protoslavs (who, indeed existed at some point, but about whom we know nothing of today), but to the Mediaeval Slavs. It was they who in the XIV century conquered Eurasia and North Africa, and in the XV century – America too.
For the first time the theory of the Etruscan language being Slavonic was expressed not by Chertkov, but by the Italian scientist Etruscan scholar Sebastiano Ciampi with whom Chertkov was personally acquainted. It was Ciampi who we can credit with the idea that the Etruscans were Slavic. However, not meeting with any approval in the scientific community, he did not follow through with his research. Chertkov developed Ciampi's theory, scientifically tested it and gave a definitive proof that the language of the Etruscans is indeed Slavonic [5v2].
I would like to draw your attention to an interesting fact. Here, for example, one of the Et-ruscan inscriptions, cited by Volansky [5v2], ch.3. How did the 'Etruscan specialists' manage to avoid reading this inscription?! IT WAS WRITTEN WITH REGULAR SLAVONIC LETTERS. And, moreover from left to right. What difficulties could prevent them from reading this text? We think, that the explanation is as follows. They consciously didn't want to. But why? Here is the answer.
In the West all the traces of the fact, that the great conquest of the XIV century and the conquest of the XV-XVI cc. were in fact Slavic and Russian-Turkic, were being destroyed. After the Reformation, in the XVII-XVIII cc., there arose an UNSPOKEN BAN ON ANY REFERENCE TO THE FORMER RUSSIAN PRESENCE IN THE WESTERN EUROPE. It found its expression in, particularly, a virtual ban on even trying to use any Slavonic languages to read so called 'illegible' inscriptions from Western Europe.
A new perception of the Et-ruscan history leads to a new approach to ancient Russian history of the XIV-XVI cc. Since the XVI century it was persistently impressed upon us that the Russian culture prior to the XVII century was of a very low level compared to the Western-European culture. And after the XVII century even more so. So, without trying to touch upon all the aspects of Et-ruscan life, i.e. a life of the Russians and Turks in Western Europe, let us see what the Et-ruscans achieved in the arts, medicine, etc. and how they did it. It becomes clear that they were able to do quite a lot. Here, for instance, are the words of the 'ancient' Diodorus Siculus (most likely a XVI-XVII cc. author), informing us of the high achievements of the Etruscans in science, culture and military arts. Many 'ancient' authors tell us about it.
The 'Etruscans', notable for their energy from time immemorial, conquered a vast territory and founded a great many cities. They created a mighty fleet and were the masters of the seas for a very long time… improved on the regulation of the army… They introduced writing, zealously studied the science of the Deities and mastered the observation of lightening. That is why until now they inspire awe in us …' Diodorus Siculus. XIV, 113. Quote according to [574], the back cover.
12. ANCIENT EGYPT.
We have decoded a number of dates recorded on the zodiacs of ancient Egypt. It was achieved by means of a radically new method of a complete decoding of the zodiacs developed by A.T.Fomenko and G.V.Nosovskiy [���] [3v2].
Thanks to the resources available to us for the first time and vast computer-generated astronomical calculations it has become possible to determine dozens of dates recorded on the ancient zodiacs. All of these dates fell into the same epoch – not earlier than the XI century. The newly discovered astronomical findings proved to be unique for the vast majority of the Egyptian zodiacs. The complete decoding of the horoscopes on the Egyptian zodiacs determined by A.T.Fomenko and G.V.Nosovsky included some partial decoding by N.A.Morozov and T.N.Fomenko suggested earlier. However it differs from them in some details.
Based on the received dater we can claim that the 'pharaohic' history of Egypt by no means unfolded over hundreds and thousands of years BC, as it is commonly thought, but in the epoch of the XI-XVI cc. AD.
The dates on the Egyptian wooden coffin-sarcophagi are interesting. They can be found in the illustrated books on Ancient Egypt and are considered to be 'very ancient'. But now it has become possible to establish precisely their true age in some instances. The fact is that on coffin lids there are sometimes depicted zodiacs with the date of death encoded in them. For example, the decoding of one of them - the Brugsch zodiac - gave us the middle of the XIX century! In other words, the 'ancient' Egyptians (aka, possibly, mamelukes) even 150 years ago were making such coffins and buried their dead in them. And now they are exhibited in many museums as alleged artifacts of the 'most ancient' history. Let us turn our attention to the history of Egypt in more detail.
# The history if Egypt gradually steps out of obscurity only from the XI-XII cc.
# The Egyptian history from the XI to the XIII cc. is very poorly covered in the documents which survive today.
# The history of Ancient Russia and the history of African Egypt are closely intertwined. The written and archaeological history of African 'Ancient' Egypt known to us today – is, essentially, its history as a part of the Horde Empire of the XIV-XVI cc.
We certainly shouldn't think, that the 'mongols'= the mighty, who invaded Egypt in the XIV century, left the Russian-Turkic people unaltered over subsequent centuries. They settled in the lands of Central and North-African, mixed with the local population and soon forgot their origins. But they made a notable contribution to the history and culture of Egypt.
# The famous 30 dynasties of the Egyptian pharaohs are on the whole the phantom reflections of the dynasties of the czar-khans of the XIII-XVI cc.
# The 'ancient' pharaohs of Egypt were the Russian-Turkic czars-khans of Russia-Horde and The Atamania (Ottoman Empire). They ruled the Empire. During their life time they appeared in African Egypt very rarely. However after their death they were undoubtedly brought here for their burial in the Central 'Mongolian' cemetery. In particular, to Giza and Luxor.
# The country of Egypt described in the Bible, is Russia-Horde of the XIV-XVI cc. [6v1], ch.4.
# The period from the first half of the XIV century to the end of the XVI century contributed the most into the history of 'Ancient' Egypt. Here many of the famous Egyptian events were focused. In this respect the Egyptian history is not an exception. In documents that survive today the history of the other regions of the epoch of the XIV-XVI cc. weighs heavily the history of the preceding epochs.
This is the epoch of the Great Empire. The conquest of the XIV century is reflected in the history of 'Ancient' Egypt as the so called the 14th dynasty of pharaohs – the Hyksos (the Mamelukes). The Egyptologists erroneously dated them to the years 1786-1570 BC. Incidentally, with remarkable accuracy – accurate, purportedly, to within one year!
The Mamelukes formed an exclusive ruling military caste in Egypt, similar to the samurai in Japan, for example. They hardly ever mixed with the rest of the population and were the Cossack-Hordian rulers of the Empire. They guarded the central imperial cemetery and oversaw the construction of the burial complexes. The social class of the Mamelukes was annihilated in the XIX century, after Napoleon. Later on the reign in Egypt was passed on to the Europeans. The local population was indoctrinated with the belief that their former rulers, the Mamelukes were evil.
The events following the 'Mongol' conquest of the XIV century date to the 18th dynasty of the pharaohs. The Egyptologists erroneously date it to the years 1570-1342 BC.
# The period of time from the end of the XVI century to year 1798. At first - the ruling of the Atamans (Ottomans) until 1585, followed by the second dynasty of the Mamelukes. It concludes with Napoleon's invasion of Egypt in 1798.
# Egypt was the religious and cultural centre of Romea of the XI-XIII centuries, and then – of the 'Mongol' Empire of the XIV-XVI cc. Here were written the chronicles including those on the stone monuments, describing not African Egypt itself as such, but the entire Great Empire, widespread over the vast territories. All the way to the Far East and America. By no means are all the hieroglyphic texts of 'Ancient' Egypt read and translated today [4v2], ch.8:3.
The African-Egyptian priests recorded the deeds of the distant Hordian czars-khans and Ottoman sultans. Later after the creation of Scaligerian history it was cunningly declared that the Egyptian chronicles exclusively describe African Egypt and its surroundings. In doing so the historians of the XVII-XIX cc. severely diminished the true scale of the 'Egyptian' events. The history of the entire vast 'Mongol' Empire was squeezed into small territorial size, 'replanted' to Africa and sent back into the remote past. So that it didn't interfere with the manufacture of the Scaligerian myth.
There are many riddles in the history of Egypt. Now they disappear. It becomes clear that Ancient Egypt, as in fact the other ancient civilizations, is just a few hundred years before us. In the epoch of the XIV-XVI cc. Egypt was only a small part of the Great Empire, although it is possible that it was Egypt which was the motherland of its czarist dynasty. Here the necropolis of the royal family was situated. That is precisely why nearly all the 'ancient' Egyptian inscriptions describe exclusively the burial rites. The Egyptian population was assigned the role of labourers and guardians of this cemetery. The czars-pharaohs didn't live themselves in Egypt. They were brought here posthumously.
The Egyptians built and decorated the royal tombs, temples and other burial constructions. All of this was carried out not by local means, but based on the resources of the entire Empire.
According to some scientists, the imposing Great Sphinx, which is situated close to the pyramids, 'represented four elements, in the form of a bull, an eagle, a lion and a human'. See [5v2], ch.6. The Great Sphinx is considered to be the most ancient structure in Egypt. The builders constructed an enormous rock and covered it… with stone blocks in order to give it the form of a Sphinx. But the symbols of a Bull, an Eagle, a Lion and a Man are considered to be the symbols of the evangelists [936], v.1, p.513.
It turns out that the Great Sphinx of Giza simply combines these Christian symbols into one monumental sculpture. So what is this symbol? It is a very familiar Christian Cherubim. It is he who has the four faces of a lion, a man, an eagle and a bull. That is what the ecclesiastical legends tell us [5v2], ch.6. Therefore it is A CHRISTIAN SYMBOL – A CHERUBIM which overlooks the field of the pyramids in Giza. Not far from it are situated numerous other cherub-sphinxes. They form the Valley of the Sphinxes.
The Circassians, i.e. the Cossacks, the Mamelukes, who assumed power in Egypt purportedly in the middle of the XIII century – are those famous Hyksos of 'Ancient' Egyptian history. The Hyksos invasion is one of the reflections of the 'Mongol' invasion of the XIV century. It was at that time when the Great Sphinx was erected by the Hyksos-Cossacks in Christian Giza, i.e. Cossack pyramid field in Giza as a Cherubic symbol. Here emerged the central burial complex of the entire 'Mongol' Empire.
13. THE PYRAMIDS AND THE BURIAL MOUNDS.
The Great Pyramid was erected not earlier than the XIV century, in the epoch of the Great Empire. There survive some information about only one of the rulers, who built the Great Pyramid. It is Khufu or Kun-Aten.
Herodotus tells us that while constructing the Great Pyramid IRON TOOLS were used [163], p.119, book II Euterpe, paragraph 125. For the XIV-XV cc. it is not only unsurprising, but absolutely typical. It is clear why also a STEEL chisel was found set within the masonry of the Khufu Pyramid [1v], ch.1.
The Egyptian pyramids are just one form of the Scythian mounds. In the modern Egyptology 'a question about the origins of the word 'pyramid' remains unsolved. Many people think…that the word 'PYRAMID' originates from the Greek PYRAMIS (from PYROS) meaning 'A SWEET CAKE MADE FROM HONEY AND WHEAT'. This cake had a shape of a cone, and Greek pilgrims compared it with a pyramid' [464], p.49.
Still in existence today is a well-known Christian Orthodox symbol called PASKHA (meaning Easter cake). It has the shape of a PYRAMID on the sides of which are usually depicted an egg and some steps, Cyrillic letters XB = Christ is Risen, i.e. the symbols of Christ's Resurrection. Today the Easter cake is made out of curd, but earlier it could have possibly been made as a cake, i.e. – baked.
It is possible, that the Egyptian pyramid-mounds are the depiction of the Christian Easter cake. And today on the edges of the 'Easter' cake-pyramid there are depicted Christian symbols. So what was carved out on the gigantic stone edges of the Egyptian pyramids? Weren't they those very symbols? Following the religious schism of the XVII century all such Christian imagery was obliterated.
Our idea is directly supported by the 'ancient' Egyptian customs and images. In 'Ancient' Egypt there were wide spread pyramidia (plural form of pyramidion) – small pyramids varying in size from several centimetres to several dozens of centimetres. They were used to decorate buildings with. They prepared festive food for holidays in the shape of small pyramids. The pyramidions 'were often painted WHITE' [1360], p.44 And furthermore: 'The pyramidions made of stone were regarded as the objects in which the 'SUN GOD' lived [1360], p.45. But it was Christ who was called the Sun! So here it is said practically directly, that 'the 'ancient' Egyptians were making the pyramid shaped Easter cakes (Easter pyramidions) in honour of Christ.
The Great Pyramids naturally fit in the epoch of the monumental constructions, which blossomed in the XIV-XVI cc. all over the Empire. They are: 1) The Great Wall of China, 2) the magnificent cathedrals of Western Europe, 3) the indomitable Kremlins and fortifications in Russia-Horde, 4) the massive Hagia Sophia in Istanbul, aka (according to our reconstruction) – The Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem = Czar-Grad, 5) the Great Sphinx, 6) the Great Pyramids and temples of Egypt 7) the great pyramids and temples of Central America, in particular Mexico, 8) gigantic constructions of Baalbeck (Lebanon). Fig. 28 shows an interesting image (from an old Japanese book) of the pyramids with crosses on the top and statues of angels on the side.
It is plausible that the three Egyptian pyramids depicted the Christian Holy Trinity. It is possible that is exactly why one of the three pyramids – Khufu Pyramid = Got – is noticeably bigger than the other two. It represented the Father. Pharaoh Khufu = Got in 'ancient times' was called SAOFIS [5v2], ch.7. Could it be – a distortion of ZEBAOTH = The Father? The Great Pyramid and the Great Sphinx in front of it were built probably as a symbol of God 'bestriding' the Cherubim.
Alternatively there could also be another explanation. The Great Pyramid symbolized The Holy Sepulchre, i.e. Christ's coffin. The colossal scale of the monument emphasized the might of the Horde Empire which created it. This could only be within the power of a rich state. Only a wealthy state could afford to make something like that.
The three large pyramids were hardly used for the burials. There are no inscriptions or images on the sarcophagus in the Great Pyramid of Cheops. It more likely resembles a treasure chest. There could have been a lot of such 'chests' there before. Here a part of the Empire's treasury was kept, as an 'emergency reserve stock'. A passage inside the chamber was covered with an enormous stone slab, which was propped up from underneath. After the attendants left the chamber, the prop was kicked out, the stone slab came crushing down the stone runners and walled up the chamber. Sometime later it was opened and the treasures were taken. The old texts say quite justly that allegedly inside the pyramid a reservoir of embossed gold coins was discovered; there were about 1000 denarii, each weighing an ounce. Al Mamoun admired the purity of this gold. Al Mamoun ordered to transfer it (the pool, - Author’s note) into his treasury [464], p.39.
It is generally thought that the Egyptian pyramids are something unique. Purporting that at the very least there are no pyramids and there never were any, neither in Europe nor in Asia. But it is not so! Pyramids are well known in Eurasia, particularly in Russia. THEY ARE – KURGANS. Besides it is evident that it is not the pyramids that preceded the mounds, but the other way round. The Great Egyptian Pyramids are in a certain sense the pinnacle of the 'mound architecture'.
It is wrong to think that the mounds should always automatically be burial mounds. The mounds were also used as the civic buildings. For example – they were used as churches. An enormous 'Tsarsky Kurgan' (Royal Mound) not far from the city of Kerch in Crimea, IN THE MIDDLE AGES WAS A CHRISTIAN CHURCH. It is a well-known fact, the explanation of which is given on the sign at the entrance to the mound [5v2], ch.7.
Tsarsky Kurgan is built as a Christian church. There is an altar with wonderful acoustics, Holy doors and a prayer area for the congregation. Three steps lead up to the amvon, to the altar, as befits a Christian church.
Moreover, the Kurgan structure was laid out in the form of a church FROM THE OUTSET. It is impossible to rebuild it without destroying the entire kurgan. Which means that we are dealing here not with a burial site, which was robbed and later adapted as a church, but with an original Christian church. Kurgan or a pyramid is a stone structure built without any binding solution. To protect from the rain penetrating such a house-kurgan, it was covered up with soil. The main difference between the Egyptian pyramids and the kurgans is only in the fact that they are not covered with soil. But this can be explained by the particular qualities of the climate in Egypt. It hardly ever rains there.
